Ryuuk
-
Posts
65 -
Joined
-
That would just be poor design in and of itself, which is the problem with MM primaries. Your example doesn't work however, because all those blaster attacks are used in the same way, and compete for spots in your attack chain all the time. For MMs, those 3 attacks are on top of their main source of damage, pets, and operate parallel to it, since they can use those attacks while the pets attack.
If you had said something like, "what if spines had 3 different damage auras that were free and did great damage, but all the attacks were low damage and high end?" that would have made more sense, since attacks and auras are more or less "independent" sources of damage. It would still be a poor way to design a set. -
Quote:It is absolutely a fact that strict level-gated content was a bedrock of this game as originally designed and released. However, changes since then have gone more or less directly the opposite way, while not eliminating previous limits altogether, allowing way more flexibility(Praetoria is an unfortunate turn from this trend, but I think the reasons behind it had little to do with this, and more to do with a "pristine" environment for the zone's launch). At this point cross-level teaming is possible almost all of the time, the primary exception being TF minimums. TFs used to be available only in the proper range, now anyone of the minimum level can do it. Scaling up would be just one more step.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Its not speculation to state that its obvious from a design perspective that level-gated content is one of the bedrock principles of the progression system in City of Heroes, and that the exemplar system is explicitly designed to be a compromise between the level-gating aspect of content and the cross-level teaming feature they want to encourage when reasonably possible.
That sounds about right. If it exists in a gray area, I'm inclined to be hopeful that it may come to pass, as opposed to assuming the worst. I have no expectation of getting a direct answer on anything from the devs, but I'm more inclined to shoot for the moon and hope they agree with me eventually.Quote:Whether that compromise resolves in a particular way for a particular piece of content is not easy to predict without directly asking the devs, and even I do not tend to get direct answers to questions of that form often (that I can repeat). But its true as a principle that the desire for content to be as widely accessible as possible is not absolute, and is balanced against the desire to provide unique content at different level ranges. As is usually true, the question is one of where specifically the line is drawn. -
Quote:Well, if you're not sure, why say anything? Unless people have specific, preferably recent dev quotes or data I generally find it worthless to speculate on their opinions. It sounds like you're nay-saying with no reason.Originally Posted by Slashman
You're right. I did skip over that part quickly. I suppose they could do that with those TFs...maybe. I'm not sure they want TFs to work that way though.
-
You're right. So just lock player choice for lvl 1. Oh no, we can't make this one AT work differently! Sure they can. It is already the most unique AT, taking away 1 choice at lvl 1 would not be the end of the world. In general, I think having crappy or redundant powers for the first 2 in a primary is poor design(not as bad as locked in first secondary, though, that's just rotten). If they're going to be made obsolete by other powers later, then spread them out more so that they aren't part of your very limited choices at lvls 1-4, or just make it a better power.
The attacks are balanced AGAINST the pets. In simple terms, they want an AT to have X damage capability. Since pets are strong, anything else must be weak. If they make personal attacks stronger, they must make pets weaker or damage potential goes up. I don't believe anyone right now thinks MM damage overall is too low.
I said they should remove them because it was poor design to put them there in the first place, definitely 3 of them. If they are in there, they're balanced correctly now. There are sets on other ATs with an absolutely abysmal power, but rarely more than 1. MM primaries have 3, 3 which in addition to being bad(by necessity), do not make a lot of sense in the context of how MMs are designed to play. If they had 1 attack each, for that situation described where all your pets are dead, that would be acceptable. 3? That's probably the single worst piece of AT design that exists in this game. At this point, anyway.
As far as primary vs pool vs app, you're right, it's inconsistent. The devs are not particularly great at thinking through all the possibilities and corner cases. Once those are pointed out to them, even money on if they will be adjusted. -
Quote:They literally made some of them attack more slowly in a recent patch. I'm not going to get into that whole argument here, it has plenty of threads, but the very existence of so many threads should say something about public perception on this issue.Originally Posted by Slashman
I don't think that's true of Praetoria mobs at all. I think they are just different, not overpowered.
You must have skipped it, that is why I specifically named Psyche, Citadel, Manticore, and Numina. Freaks, Council, Crey, Freaks/Nemesis/Crey/CoT/DE. All of those enemy groups have existing level 50 composition. I didn't ask for level 50 Hellions.Quote:This is not currently possible. The devs have stated that certain mob groups cannot be scaled up just by moving a slider. Lower level mobs have attacks that are appropriate in number and effect for their intended level range only. They are simply not made to challenge players outside of their range.
Whether or not you or I think this is a good idea, that is how the game is designed. They would have to rework each mob group to scale across all levels. Some, like the Circle of Thorns were built like that from the get-go. That's why you see them replacing their spawn composition with new enemies as you go up in level. Most, however, have a specific and intended level range that also ties into story and lore.
In essence, you will not see a level 50 Hellion unless the devs reworked the Hellion group to scale that way. Which I I honestly do not think they will. -
Quote:It's funny, when I first read that sentence I interpreted it incorrectly. I took it to mean "existing content should be scalable to all levels." That's something I have been thinking about for a long time. Now, I would certainly not say "all content," but let's look at tfs. I enjoy doing them, but I am not particularly a fan of losing powers or enhancement strength, so while I will occasionally exemp down for one, I am more likely just to do it on a character in the appropriate level range.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
If someone says "I think the devs should make sure the new content they are developing gets eventually balanced across all levels" well you know, they might be right.
However, what if tfs scaled to the leader or highest member of a team. In other words, instead of doing it at the current level cap for that tf, you do it as high as your level allows. Some of them wouldn't need much work at all, actually. Sister Psyche, Citadel, Manticore, Numina: all of these enemy groups exist at level 50. Obviously if the group has different mobs at 50, those would be in the missions. Lower level tfs would need more serious modification, but even that would be pretty doable. Synapse could have you fighting psychic clockwork.
I actually think this could be done for Praetoria's low level arcs. A lot of people already believe the mobs have powers more suited for medium to high level anyway, just crank them up a bit more and anyone could run these arcs while not having to suffer early level weakness(once primals are allowed in, obviously).
I think that allowing tfs or other content to scale all the way to 50 could be a relatively low-effort way to give 50s more to do. -
Quote:In that situation it is better to run, and then resummon. Yes, in that specific scenario, with 1 enemy with a sliver of health and all pets dead, it would be nice to have an attack. It is a very unlikely scenario, though, and I don't think 3 powers should be devoted to it. 1 at the most, although I would still think it a waste.Originally Posted by Jade_Dragon
The problem is that the attacks were clearly meant to provide protection for the Mastermind in the event that he has lost all of his henchmen. Sure, as Samuel said, it is more efficient and better in the long run to stop attacking and begin resummoning your henchmen on the fly. Particularly since Bodyguard can be more valuable to your survivability when you are being overwhelmed. However, if you are at a sliver of health, and a single foe is at a sliver of health, it is entirely possible that firing a single shot would prevent you from dying, while taking the cast time to summon a henchman would lead to you taking a hit that would kill you.
One of the first 2 powers does have an offensive benefit, it is a pet. Therefore even if the second was not an attack, you could not make such a character. From there you can choose your 2nd secondary power, etc. We aren't forced to take the second power in our primary, ever(and in fact many masterminds don't, and never have a personal attack). A power whose only intended purpose is to get you a level or two higher and then be unused is absolutely atrocious design. Also, every character has brawl and the origin attack. Normally I wouldn't even include them in the discussion, but they are not that much worse than actual MM attacks.Quote:A secondary issue is that the devs NEVER want to leave you with no offensive powers. You are forced to pick among your first two powers in your Primary set, and they must both have offensive benefit, or you will be able to create a character that cannot deal damage AT ALL. Unless the devs gave you two Tiers of henchmen at level 1 to choose between, which I suspect they would not do, your second choice must be an attack. So in essense, that attack is useless for all other levels, but is intended to get you to level 2 so you can take the other Power choice.
All of the attacks available to MMs(primary, pool, app) are balanced now. They are balanced against the rest of the offensive capability of the AT. There simply isn't any argument to be made that MMs need either more damage or even more endurance-efficient damage. Right now MMs have one of the best levels of mitigation and damage combined of all ATs in the game.Quote:Finally, removing the attacks from the Primary would not help the attacks in the Power Pool or Patron Pools, which although you have the choice whether or not to take them, still have the same issue of being based on the MM's 0.55 damage modifier. They are just as useless as the Primary attacks, and taking the Primary attacks out of the picture doesn't change that. I would honestly rather see them all balanced. (Although at least the attacks in the Power Pool already cost the same as the other ATs)
Are there very specific set combinations in other ATs that can deal more damage and have equally good survivability? Maybe, but they usually lack buff/debuff which can be immensely helpful to a team. MMs are at the high end of strength in this game. If their personal offense improves it would probably require a corresponding decrease in the strength of their pets, which would just water them down and make them more like other ATs. I think that's a bad thing, lots of other ATs are kind of generic in playstyle, like melee classes. Let's not make the most unique AT play more like the rest. If anything, give them more mastermindy powers, and less attacks. -
Total non-starter due to the cottage rule, but I don't think MM primaries should have attacks at all. They can't get good or even mediocre attacks because their pets are so powerful, and as stated why have near-useless powers in any set, much less 3 of them? If an MM really wants attacks, he can go to pools or APPs, just like any other AT has to do to get powers outside of their normal purview.
Those 3 powers could be more unique and thematic powers for each set. Currently, every set gets 1(gang war, serum, etc.), and for the most part those are fun, useful powers. Maybe necro could get an enemy rez into a pet, or maybe a high self auto resist to negative energy, since they are so attuned to death. Bots could get a gestalt power that ate some of your existing henchmen and summoned a stronger one for a short period of time, or maybe a robot double that looks like your character and functions as a decoy like phantasm has. Just some fun, thematic stuff that goes better with the AT's design than attacks which have to be bad for balance reasons.
Sadly, not to be, maybe something for them to keep in mind for coh2. Or they could get really radical and grandfather in existing MMs with attacks... -
100 merits+40m inf, not just 100 merits. Or 2-4 hours of playtime spread out over 4 days(depending on how fast you run Tip mishes).
AMs are interesting because it opens up a third path to wealth, so to speak. Previously, anyone so inclined could either farm, play the market, or both. Not everyone likes marketeering or is good at it(I'm not particularly good at it, so I don't like it). Not everyone likes farming or knows how to make a good farming character(I like it and I do know, luckily). Now, anyone can play their ST specialist or even support AT and do okay. A lot of players would be thrilled at the concept of making 100m for 3-4 hours of more or less normal play. Granted, sooner or later the Tip mishes become a grind too, but at least there are different maps and enemy groups.
For what it's worth, I have the opposite feeling of some, I'm not interested in spending AMs on anything other than pvp recipes. They are the one thing I cannot get pretty darn easily on my own, in a timely fashion. -
The fact is, random kb causes scatter. Regardless of the direction they move, because the knockback is random, some of them will get moved, and some of them won't. If you have 10 mobs clustered around a tank, and you do an aoe with 50% kb, on average 5 of them will stay where they were and the other 5 will have moved. They went from being in 1 group to being in 2 groups some feet apart, they have scattered. This is an inarguable fact about non-guaranteed kb, and the closer the chance is to 50%, the worse it is.
-
Quote:It's not putting the farming aspect back in, they're farmed now, just farmed once per day per character. Yes, my suggestion would let people farm them more than that, but still not allow them to actually get the benefit of the farming more often than they can now. All things considered, I view this kind of farming as much more accessible to the average player. It doesn't take an IOed out aoe-heavy build.Originally Posted by Fury Flechette
I can't agree with your suggestion. The purpose of these was actually as a means for players to earn these rewards without farming or using the market. The ironic thing about your suggestion is that you want to put the farming aspect of it back in. It's the whole reason why they put the time limit in there in the first place. They don't want players hording like they are currently doing with reward merits.
This is the first I've heard of hording as a concern. Did the devs talk about this in beta? Are you talking about hording while leveling up, and then spending them all at 50? I'm not sure what the difference is between saving 1000 merits and then spending them after 2 months or whatever and spending them as they're earned. The same stuff is coming into existence. -
lgtf+itf
-
You are choosing to run it at +0/x5. That is contrary to the notion of fast.
For me, this is the fastest you can get and do your tip missions at level 50 blueside. Insure you are on -1/x1. In Talos, kill greys until first Tip drops which has a mission in Talos, dismissing those which are not in Talos. Head towards that mission, killing along the way, more Tips should drop. If a new drop is even closer than the one you are heading for, switch to that one. Even missions with 3 or 4 objectives do not take long at all on -1/x1. Exit mission, head to the next one, killing more if you run out of Talos tips. Shouldn't take more than 30-45 minutes if your character is even halfway decent at soloing. I don't even have a travel power(though I do have Ninja Run), and I am almost always at 30 minutes.
This may be more difficult redside, I don't know. -
What I am telling you is that I do in fact do that every day, except for earning 20m inf. I run 5-6 mishes, then 50 merits worth of other stuff, every day, in around 2 hours, sometimes shorter, sometimes longer. I think you are vastly overestimating how long it takes to acquire and complete Tip Missions. From logging on, I will have my first Tip within a couple of minutes, and probably have that mission completed within another 5, rinse and repeat. Around 30-40 minutes for all Tip plus Alignment, then about 90 minutes to get 50 Merits. If I choose to do less efficient tfs/arcs it might take a little longer, but that's on me.
Like I said, if I had to earn another 20m inf, it would take another hour tops, so 3 hours. This is not supposition or theory, it is my actual play experience.
My whole premise is, shouldn't someone be able to achieve the same result that I do in 3 days of playing 2 hours /day(6 hours total), by playing one day for 6 hours? It seems pretty simple to me. -
That 70 day figure is mathematically true. If you're not willing to do a little mental work to keep up with what is being said in the thread, maybe you should stop replying to it. For someone so hung up on data you seem to have a poor grasp of the data that I have provided.
You are saying my suggestion is "poor", but have given no reason for why that is. That is a vague descriptor which in this case is meaningless. The difference between the daily player and the non-daily player who play the same amount of hours over time is in fact "real information." -
Okay, you have no counter-argument. You are not saying my idea or concern is wrong, you are saying that without data(99% of which the players never see), we players should not be making suggestions at all. By the way, at no point did I say the devs do not datamine, I know they do. In this case, I think the basic principle "time played should equal time played," does not need data to support or refute it. This is not true of the current AM system, so I put forth a suggestion to change it.
Hellincarnate: my main does not have a stockpile of merits, I do earn those every day. As for the inf, yes I have some saved, but if I didn't, it would increase my daily playtime by an hour at most to get 20m. -
Quote:Evidence to the contrary of what? You aren't making any counter-claim here, you're just saying "we need data." What is the data going to prove or disprove? My argument is "14 hours should equal 14 hours." What exactly are you arguing?Originally Posted by PennyPA
Maybe like how much merits are being collected and spent? How many recipes purchased by A merits vs. the market? How many players actually use the system? Etc. Why don't you just let the system play out for a bit? The devs have made changes to the merit system for arcs/TFs before based on datamining, you would almost expect them to datamine the new data here. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
So a person who plays 12 hours/day on weekends is more casual than someone who plays 1-2 hours every day? The weekend guy is playing a lot more over the span of a week, month, or year.Quote:I see casual as a few times, like weekends only. You obviously have some other definition.
My suggestion does the exact same thing, they could not get them any faster. They could, however, work towards them on their own schedule, instead of a daily one.Quote:It keeps them in check by limiting how fast they can produce these recipes.
As I said, if they simply apply a timer to the purchases themselves, as opposed to the earning, it would achieve the same effect, while not promoting a particular play schedule. You have yet to explain why this would be bad, you just keep saying "it's new, let's see some data." You have not explained why my suggestion is wrong or harmful.Quote:The times used are there to prevent some players obtaining things far faster than a normal player since they can be on far more often or do things that other can't (like various multibox conditions). -
If I had been in beta I would have suggested this then. What meaningful data would be collected?
It does not keep power gamers in check at all, it simply means that every 20 days they will acquire x pvp recipes, where x is the number of characters they have time to grind daily. It does incentivize daily play for those power gamers, so I guess one could argue that it keeps weekend power gamers in check, but not daily ones.
I don't see why you would call player B casual and not player A, they play the same number of hours each week. Players A and B should receive the same reward because they are playing the game for the same length of time. That should be obvious. -
The existing system limits the acquisition of Alignment Merits to 1/20 hours for conversion(50 Merits plus 20 million inf) and 1/40 hours for earning via Morality Mission. For the purposes of discussion, I will call that 3 AMs/2 days, or 1.5 AMs/day. This has the distinct effect of encouraging daily play on a specific character(s), since AMs are non-transferable(as are Merits).
It is the daily part which bugs me. It seems obvious that the goal is to limit how often one can purchase rewards with AMs, especially purple and pvp recipes, the most expensive and rare items. That is fine as a concept. However, wouldn't it make more sense to put a timer on the purchases themselves, and not the earning? As of now, this is how often things can be bought, in terms of days played one one character, either consecutive or non-consecutive:
pvp recipe: 1/20 days
purple recipe: 1/14 days
respec recipe: 1/7 days
Example 1: Player A is able to play for 2 hours each day, or 14 hours each week. This enables him to run his Tip Missions every day on his main, his Alignment Mission every other day, and generate 50 Merits every day for conversion. He will acquire 1.5 AMs/day and 10.5 AMs/week. He can acquire the rewards in the actual number of days above. It will take him 20 real days to earn a pvp recipe.
Example 2: Player B is not able to play during the week. He is able to play for 7 hours each on Saturday and Sunday, or 14 hours each week. This enables him to run 1 full set of Tip Missions plus the Alignment Mission for his main, earning 1 AM. He is able to convert 100 Merits plus 40 million inf for 2 more AMs. He will acquire 3 AMs over those 2 days and 3 AMs/week. It will take him 10 weeks, or 70 real days, to earn a pvp recipe.
Compare that to all other rewards in the game, including xp, inf, recipe/salvage drops, and Merits. For all of those things Player A and Player B could have the same result after their 14 hours of play. With AMs it is impossible. I do not know if it was intentional, but for the first time(?) there is a game system which actively promotes a specific play schedule at the expense of others. Yes, Task Forces do have timers on their rewards as well, but one can always do a different TF or a story arc, and always be producing Merits.
My suggestion: add a timer to the purchase of each item, like the one which is on "Convert Merits" right now. If they do not want a player producing a pvp recipe(on a single character) faster than 1/20 days, set that timer at 20 days. Allow a character to run as many Tip and Alignment Missions as they would like within their existing alignment to earn AMs. This would maintain current time limits on side-switching, while allowing "burst" players like player B above to earn AMs as much as they can during their playtime. -
Quite the opposite, I would think. Purples cost a whopping 20 AMs, lotgs cost 2. So for 20 AMs you could get a purple or 10 lotgs, which at current rates would be worth over a billion inf, way more than any purple costs. Some people might very well buy purples with AMs, but they would be foolish to do so and they will be in the extreme minority. Either you make the smart play and go for pool c(even at reduced value it is still a good deal), or have the patience to wait for a premium pvp recipe, which is an even better value. If people are earning AMs they are probably earning purples at a lower rate than they were previously, especially if they used to farm. Pool C will continue to decline, eventually settle. Purples will get even higher. PvP recipes will stay random and 2B+
I have to go with c), ignorance. The devs have never shown they have any idea at all about how or why the market works. They cried doom for years at the thought of a market merge. Guess what, it happened and basically nothing of consequence has occurred. They were really possessed of some bizarre notion that villains would get run over by heroes in the marketplace. -
I've been too lazy to post that, and also uninterested in defending the truth from people convinced that some mitigation is worth a massive loss in team efficiency. You're 100% right, though.
-
Some sort of diminishing endurance help similar to beginner's luck is a good idea, if one agrees with the notion that the endurance system/numbers we currently have is fine.
The thing is, I find stamina-less builds that require specific types of slotting or enhancements to be of a similar vein to high-end builds: you shouldn't balance around them. The same way you shouldn't nerf or buff a set because of how it performs at 50 with a specialized build and tons of rare IO sets, but rather how it performs throughout a characters career with SOs, you should look at the average player's experiences with endurance and the extreme prevalence of stamina amongst the playerbase at large.
Absolutely, there should be a progression of power in a character's career, but my perception is that the devs have tried to balance it around a progression of increasing fun, as opposed to decreasing unfun, which is what beginner's luck(and many early pvp changes) were all about. People do not like missing. Heck, players have base 75% chance to hit against even con enemies, even at level 1, but that was still not enough, so they added beginner's luck.
Just like missing, people do not like running out of end and being unable to use powers. I am not advocating the abolition of endurance, but the bottom line is that people want to be having some effect on the game as often as possible, and both missing and not being able to act at all make a player feel powerless.
Many non-mmo games have resources as well, such as ammo, but they are usually dealing with predefined levels/maps where an appropriate amount of the resource is available at regular intervals, and it is exceedingly rare or even impossible for a player to be unable to take any action at all(when out of ammo you can still use a melee attack, etc.) Yes, we have brawl, but...it's brawl.
Should the devs take a poll? No. Should they datamine and try and figure out if "too many" players feel the need for a specific power? Yes. Maybe they've already done so and decided they are happy with it, but if it was a long time ago, now(when they have a new expansion and hopefully many new and returning players) might be a good time to revisit it. -
They're not outrageous if someone will pay them. Even at 2b minus fees it is a good deal if you prefer combat to market activities. What's more important than that is the fact that you get a pvp recipe of your choice, guaranteed. Having 2b inf does not mean you can buy a pvp recipe off the market whenever you want, you get to wait and hope the rng likes you, and that you get one in days as opposed to months.
Put it this way, for the same cost as a good pvp recipe you could instead buy 15 lotg's or 150 random gold rolls. Which is worth more?
Also, does anyone think this was their attempted fix for things selling for over market cap off-market? Giving everyone(everyone who wants to play a true hero or villain anyway) the ability to earn one on their own? It won't work, for reasons Fulmens just stated. -
The thing I don't get is...why are TFs on reward cooldown but ouro arcs arent? I was hoping someone would jump in with the explanation for that one today lol.
-
Originally, in this thread:
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=234755
it was asked why there is a timer on the spending of alignment merits. My response was this:
"The entire morality system, including tip missions, alignment missions, and the earning and spending of alignment merits, is a more of the cooldown/gated content philosophy(which is already present for TF rewards and pvp IOs) that Positron describes as "super-annoying to players."
http://www.mmodesigner.com/?p=113
In essence, activity/reward cooldowns are a restriction/punishment for those who are able and willing to play quite frequently, and a fake balance mechanism. If a particular reward is difficult or time-consuming enough to get within the bounds of gameplay itself, there is no need to install an artificial cooldown."
I am interested in exploring this topic further. This forum may not be the most 100% appropriate, but since most of the gated content in this game involves rewards, usually IOs or the means to get them, it seems relevant here. Plus, this forum has better math skills than most. if I get any facts wrong please point it out.
Currently, the majority of things in the game that are character-locked are merits of all kinds. "Regular" merits are a bit strange in that one method for obtaining them, TFs, are on a cooldown(to receive full reward, anyway), yet others, like killing GMs, or running story arcs in ouro, are not.
Why is this? It definitely seems like it favors the soloist who can fine-tune a character to run an efficient arc for good merits. The fact that it can be done without taking the time to assemble a team, and that completion time will not vary based on team composition and behavior, seems to favor it heavily compared to TFs. Also, it can be started and stopped at will, whereas on a TF any player who takes a break while the rest of the team is not has effectively slowed everyone else down.
Many players prefer teaming to soloing, or have a character that is not particularly good at soloing. These players would obviously rather use TFs than solo arcs for gaining merits. Why are they penalized for liking a given TF enough to run it twice in a row(or within 18 hours) with the same character? If a TF has the appropriate reward for the time needed to complete it, why would anyone care how often it was done? This seems like an implicit admission that merit rewards are too high.
Even more strangely, some of the most desirable recipes in the game, purples, have no cooldown whatsoever attached, and are best earned by soloing repetitively. Inf earning also falls into this category, for the most part.
Now we have alignment merits. These have cooldowns on both earning and spending, and they can also be spent on almost any recipe in the game, including purples and pvp IOs. They can be earned solo.
Is it just me or are there a lot of contradictions here? Repetition is allowed/encouraged for soloists, but discouraged for team players?
Wouldn't the simplest solution be to reduce TF merit rewards to the point that it is acceptable for someone to repeat it?
I am absolutely rambling at this point. Opinions, agreements, disagreements?